[ga] Registrants Identification for Membership

[Hugh Dierker <hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx>]

Great stuff here. But be clear. This Identification process is for the 
Constituency.  A membership criteria. Do not stick it to people contributing to 
the foundation.  First get a group going. I suggest doing it here, which does 
not have such a restricted gateway.
 
Mr. Palmer is already showing the problem with engaging in it right up front. 
Leave the flaming and individual specific preclusions and troll baiting for 
once a system is set. I think we can all see the obvious pitfalls of starting 
out by the very negative notion of precluding rather than including. 
 
I think registrants are going to have to suck it up on this one for a while 
because they are going to have to go by the WHOIS data to begin. We all know 
the problems of spoofing there but if that is a barrier to beginning you will 
never get it done. In order to ID you are going to have to accept the 
longstanding, longsuffering data proof for obtaining a registration. For if you 
say you can register a name but cannot be a member of the registrants community 
it is a non-starter.  You simply cannot fix a moving train without being on 
board.

--- On Thu, 5/20/10, Andrew McMeikan <andrewm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


From: Andrew McMeikan <andrewm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [ga] |Going forward towards a Registrant's Constituency
To: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Thursday, May 20, 2010, 5:23 PM



sotiris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> First, let's thank Joop for offering up the IDNO charter for us to use as
> a basis for an RC charter.
> 
> Next, let's get one piece of fundamental business out ofthe way. When i
> voted in the ICANN 2000 AtLarge election, it was only after my identity
> had been verified and a letter had been sent to my physical address with
> my acct/password info for voting day. In order for us to move forward on
> creating an RC we need to VERIFY that the prospective membership is who
> they say they are. Fortunately, there are many options available for us
> today. My preference would be for a digital certificate. Does anyone have
> any problem with being required to provide proof of one's identity in
> order to participate in a Registrant's Constituency? If anyone does have a
> problem, the solution is simple, they can form their own constituency of
> non-identities. I am willing to put the work into an RC but only with
> other verified individuals. So, who's willing to join me in this
> endeavour?
> 
> Sotiris Sotiropoulos
> 

I support this.  What type of digital certificate do you propose?
As some SSL certificates have been forged perhaps something simple
like pgp / gpg keys, this is free and easy for everyone, makes email
voting very simple and makes for a visible web of trust so the
certification level of everyone can be seen.

    cya,    Andrew...